Comments

Wavehog Films: The move to video is known as a "pivot." In other words, a realization that: your product is "sheit"; you as CEO, are about to get canned; and, to avoid giving money back to investors, liquidating and hanging your head in shame, you need another cocked-up venture to keep the pyramid scheme alive : )

I don't think anyone ever said that about Apple.

But regardless, in 1997, Apple was a very well known and established company, completely unlike Lytro, who are a floundering startup.

AlexisH: I wonder what they'll try after video? Sounds like no one wants the current tech for stills. And then I expect that video will not provide the resolution for professional use and that the amateurs won't have the time and interest to select focus themselves.

My computer is an i7-4790K with 32GB RAM and dual GT780Ti graphics cards.

Editing and rendering full HD 1080P video is quite speedy. Editing 4K (no proxies) is also easy, rendering takes a little longer than Full HD (as expected), but easily doable.

If you really want to edit video, then get the necessary hardware or just be prepared to wait longer during rendering.

For years I have edited HD video. NEVER had a problem, even with a much older, less powerful computer. Just took longer to render.

ludwik123: life is full of surprises. For the past six months we have had rumours of the P8000, a large sensor successor to the P7800. instead we get the P900, a small sensor superzoom. if i was shopping for a bridge camera this would be top of my list.

Wavehog Films: The move to video is known as a "pivot." In other words, a realization that: your product is "sheit"; you as CEO, are about to get canned; and, to avoid giving money back to investors, liquidating and hanging your head in shame, you need another cocked-up venture to keep the pyramid scheme alive : )

No, I have already decided not to waste my money on anything Lytro.

However, if in 5 to 10 years from now, they actually do come out with something useful, that actually addresses an imaging problem I have, I will certainly give them a second look. Assuming, of course, they are still around by then.

Personally, I think they are just trying to stay afloat long enough to sell off the technology to a deep pockets company, such as say... Apple or Microsoft.

HowaboutRAW: In 1974, maybe '75, IBM released it's first PC at a cost of something like $50,000, in mid70s dollars. (Irony the PC was at least assembled in Seattle.)

1981, different story.

Look what happened within 20 years to the PC market, and the usefulness of PCs. Every computer development for broad public use that has occured between 1995 and 2015 was well predicted in 1995 by anyone paying attention to computers.

Contrast 1975: Almost none of what came to pass in computers in the next 20 years upto 1995 was being predicted--even by people paying attention to computers. Maybe digital audio. Even into the early 1980s physicists who wanted to demonstrate a new program, software, they'd worked on at a conference would often travel to the conference with the program recorded on punch cards. That's cardboard.

No the Lytro is not likely to be as radical a change to photography as the broad use of a computer, but the nay-sayers here sure sound like many talking about computers in the 1970s.

VisiCalc was realeased about 4 years PRIOR to Lotus 123, in mid-1979. IBM had an IBM 5100 portable computer as early as 1975 (but not the IBM PC we all know). The 5100 weighed 50ibs. It was mid-1981 before the first IBM-PC arrived on the scene.

AlexisH: I wonder what they'll try after video? Sounds like no one wants the current tech for stills. And then I expect that video will not provide the resolution for professional use and that the amateurs won't have the time and interest to select focus themselves.

How aboutRAW "Have you tried to edit 4K video?"

Which has WHAT to do with a 4K Video lytro?

Editing 4K (conventional) video is a breeze. I do it a lot now that I own a 4K camera.

Henrik Herranen: Video of today is 4K / UHD, or in other words around eight megapixels. Lytro images show obvious digital artifacting even at 0.2 (zero point two) megapixels. Reference: pixelated out of focus areas between hand and background in http://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/1418225486/IMG_0331-ShallowDOF-520px.jpeg from article http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1418225486/lytro-introduces-focus-spread-feature

Wavehog Films: The move to video is known as a "pivot." In other words, a realization that: your product is "sheit"; you as CEO, are about to get canned; and, to avoid giving money back to investors, liquidating and hanging your head in shame, you need another cocked-up venture to keep the pyramid scheme alive : )

It's about as close to dung as a modern camera can get. It solves no problems for a real photographer and actually introduces a few. Amatuers (or if you prefer, the mass market consumer) won't buy for a variety of reasons, and they have mostly moved to cell phones for their photography.

Henrik Herranen: Video of today is 4K / UHD, or in other words around eight megapixels. Lytro images show obvious digital artifacting even at 0.2 (zero point two) megapixels. Reference: pixelated out of focus areas between hand and background in http://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/1418225486/IMG_0331-ShallowDOF-520px.jpeg from article http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1418225486/lytro-introduces-focus-spread-feature

This technology doesn't work.

Editing 4K is not a problem. 4K is the future of 'home' video. You will see a big push this year and into the future.

4K 60p cameras are available, but not priced for the consumer market. That too, I think will change. Although personally, I don't know why the average consumer would want 60p.

Papi61: The camera market is older and more traditional, i.e. less open to innovation.The video market is younger and more experimental, ready to accept innovation.RED tried to market their products as photo cameras and failed. They switched focus to 100% video and now they virtually own the indie market.

Smart move, Lytro.

The problem RED had was they promised the original Scarlet at around $2000, fully functional. But they were unable to deliver on that promise. Instead the Scarlet morphed into what is available today at somewhat (read MUCH) higher prices than originally promised.

Saying RED now owns the indie market is something of an overstatement.

faterikcartman: I was a Canon film shooter beginning in the 1970s. And I thought they were the bang-for-the-buck leader. I held off on digital but finally went Nikon. I've been unsure about that decision off and on over the years. And I've even regretted it from time to time. I'm fully vested now. But still check out new offerings as many have happily sold everything to jump ship (financial loss notwithstanding). I have an IPF8100 and IPF8300 so I can actually make use of more pixels.

But, I'm sorry to say, the first thing this camera makes me think of is "keep the Nikon gear and buy that Pentax 645Z. I'm not sure there's more quality pixels to be squeezed out of FF. I suppose there may be some who still buy based on pixel count alone. But are there really that many left who would into a large SLR system like this?

IMO, if Canon (or Nikon) wish to move into the 50+ megapixel game it is time to roll out a new lens mount. Beat that 645Z price and you'll get people interested.

I agree with your last paragraph. The problem is, the market for MF cameras is vanishingly small.

geenoz: You whinny poo haters, stopit already , if you cant see why we need 50mp dont worry yourselves into a heart attack, mirrorles this and mirrorless that wide DR, please get a life. Some cannot afford this camera so they crap all over it like a new born baby,stopit. Haters. Family portrait shooters will love this camera, when I look at the Images from medium format digital, I can only dream of one day owning one of those bad boys, Canon comes along to help us out a little and all of a sudden its not enough or its too much. Give the camera a chance to prove ifself. Nikon did an excellent job with the 800 model cams, at one point comparing it to medium format. So its not just the megapix race, its the Canon haters, so get the hell outta here and head on back to whatever ya shoot with and leave the photographers that make a living with their cameras alone,jeez

I think it is a very interesting camera. I will also be very curious to see what Sony and Nikon do in the way of a response.

Personally, I have zero need for 50MP, and if I was going to go 50MP, I would much prefer to go the Pentax 645 route.

Miles Lye: If Sony can get IBIS and exceptional high iso performance in the A7RII, then what's the point in upgrading or considering this camera or a Nikon alternative? Why pay more for less? The A7 cameras aren't perfect at all but Sony is making amazing progression in a short amount of time and they listen. After using an A7 and seeing the progression with the A7s and A7II, I don't doubt Sony will make this camera look dated when the A7RII is announced.

If you are talking about FE mount lenses, then I agree with you. But talk about A mount and now you have a whole new ballgame.